Letters to the Editor
sysprog
Published Letters: 1591 Editor's Choice: 2
-
The sober, serious, WALL STREET JOURNAL
[Read the article: The American media's fringe ideological view of Pelosi's trip]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009903
OPINION JOURNAL
from The Wall Street Journal editorial page
Democrats at War Prime Minister Pelosi and Secretary of State Lantos undermine U.S. foreign policy -- and maybe their own party.
Friday, April 6, 2007. . . Meanwhile, Speaker Nancy Pelosi made her now famous sojourn to Syria, donning a head scarf
http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/040607pelosi.jpg
. . . In the 1990s, these columns defended Bill Clinton against "the Republican drift toward isolationism and political opportunism" amid the Kosovo conflict. But . . . Even Newt Gingrich, for all his grand domestic ambitions in 1995, took a muted stand on foreign policy, realizing that in the American system the executive has the bulk of national security power. He also understood he would do the country no favors by sending a mixed message to our enemies -- at the time, Slobodan Milosevic.What Pelosi said to Assad was completely consistent with the Administration's publicly announced foreign policy goals, and therefore the WSJ extremists find themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to criticize her not for what SHE said, but for something that Tom Lantos said (but which Pelosi actually refuted). She refused to even hint at making any concessions to Assad. Boy, that must have annoyed the WSJ! The only thing she did that's contrary to Administration policy is to actually speak the Bush administration's demands and publicly stated goals directly to Assad. Going to Damascus, and crossing herself in front of the alleged tomb of the head of John the Baptist (but inside a mosque, and while donning a scarf) and telling Assad what the U.S. wants him to do, are all, according to the WSJ, evil un-American un-Christian acts. Somehow the WSJ even manages to twist their argument into a pretzel and criticize Pelosi for having voted, in 2003, to demand that Bush start getting tough with Syria.
How twisty can their pretzel get? They even contend, with feigned (c'mon, they CAN'T believe it) seriousness, that "Newt Gingrich . . . took a muted stand on foreign policy."
-
Hello? Mattel Quality Control?
[Read the article: The American media's fringe ideological view of Pelosi's trip]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Can we get our money back? We bought some of your Chatty Cathy The Bloviator dolls, as advertised on CNN, for our nieces for Easter, but when we pull their strings, they only say "Logan Act! Logan Act!" and "Neville! Munich!".